EVE Search - Petition to change Logserver / ban BACON.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Petition to change Logserver / ban BACON.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
NightF0x Gallente Chicken Coup Raiders	Posted - 2008.05.04 23:23:00 - [1] Edited by: NightF0x on 04/05/2008 23:24:56 Edited by: NightF0x on 04/05/2008 23:23:22 Originally by: CCP Atropos Originally by: Havohej Originally by: cyt0matrix All hail Atropos and nightmarex. :) Finally we stop worrying about bacon. :P Yeah... now we just have to worry about whether CCP is going to make it an official game feature. Note the mention of EVE Voice in response to people using TS and Vent That was why I mentioned it, to play with your minds! Seriously though, do you think we would actually encourage afk play? I don't want to be critical here but if CCP really does want to keep people from using such programs then why hasn't there been a client update to disable (or delay) writing to the log file? A simple 10 second delay would be enough to turn most users off from using it. It could be a temporary fix until something more permanent is released. The lack of updates to discourage the usage is why most people feel that CCP doesn't care to patch this obvious security hole. Edit: Personally I expected a patch the following day after their big 'we frown on the usage' post. I'm saddened along with a vast majority of players that nothing has been done to keep gameplay on a level playing field.
NightF0x Gallente Chicken Coup Raiders	Posted - 2008.05.05 01:54:00 - [2] Originally by: Reuser Again, CCP, please respond... Originally by: Reuser Can we take this as a communication to pull the BACON website? As we have said MULTIPLE times in e-mail, we will be happy to. Second, someone in CCP needs to address the fact, as alluded to by CCP Grimmi, that there are many tools like BACON, and being used by large groups of people in secret. Third, I'm not sure, as a developer, how much more transparent we could have been. Perhaps you can advise me. Advance knowledge, requests for approval, open source, changing our code. How can we in the future give CCP more insight into our process? I think the third point is the most important. How does one get "OFFICIAL" approval for an application? We've had every CCP response from 'this doesn't look like a problem', to 'this isn't a problem' on to 'we frown on it' to now, apparently, 'You brought an existing problem to light, you're a cheater.' That's in sequential order, by the way. How does a third party software developer go about getting a canonical answer? Please link to the thread that anyone with authority at CCP said 'this isn't a problem'. ------------------------------------
NightF0x Gallente Chicken Coup Raiders	Posted - 2008.05.05 02:17:00 - [3] Originally by: Reuser Originally by: NightF0x Please link to the thread that anyone with authority at CCP said 'this isn't a problem'. Sure! Link No where do they say 'this isn't a problem'. They said that it doesn't appear to be a problem and that they will report back if it does but they don't give it two thumbs up as you happen to suggest. ------------------------------------
NightF0x Gallente Chicken Coup Raiders	Posted - 2008.05.05 02:24:00 - [4] Originally by: Finger Licking Originally by: CCP Atropos What I've said, is basically a restatement of what Lead GM Grimmi said in his initial post. BACON is making use of the Logserver in a way that was never intended. Whilst it may not be a definative violation of the EULA and TOS, that doesn't mean it's something that we're particularly pleased with. As Lead GM Grimmi said "we frown upon the use of this information for any other purpose and we are currently working on changes to prevent this". The Logserver was meant to help solve bugs, not give anyone a viable or quantifiable ingame advantage. Originally by: GM Grimmi There does not appear to be any violation of our EULA or TOS here so we believe this should be ok. Please be advised that we will thoroughly investigate any reports that would point to the contrary and reserve the right to change our minds if deemed appropriate. Hmmm, I don't see where GM Grimmi said this in his post....not that I disagree with you, but it seems to be a contradiction between what was said and what was remembered as being said. If you are talking to Atropos then you have the wrong Grimi quote. He was referring to this quote. Quote: Greetings, The LogServer output is solely intended by CCP as information for developers to help identify and fix bugs. While BACON, and the many similar tools currently used by a large number of players, may technically not be in violation of our EULA/TOS, we frown upon the use of this information for any other purpose and we are currently working on changes to prevent this sort of unintended use of information provided by the LogServer. Regards, GM Grimmi Lead Game Master ------------------------------------
NightF0x Gallente Chicken Coup Raiders	Posted - 2008.05.05 02:26:00 - [5] Originally by: Meat Hook Fair enough you want to change it because it's taking advantage of the logserver in ways you never intended and I respect and understand that, I would never use this anyway. Only problem I have is that CCP never done anything about these programs in the past when big Alliances were using similar programs. Now that Gunfleet has brought it to the masses you want to finally stop it. If you are talking about balance and fairness why didn't CCP start working on the problem before it was shown to the little guys of EVE? How do you know that they weren't and never told anyone about it? They do tend to fix exploits, which BACON is, before they announce that they exist. ------------------------------------
NightF0x Gallente Chicken Coup Raiders	Posted - 2008.05.05 10:08:00 - [6] Originally by: Ikki Phoenix personally,I have said many times: 1.Bacon is not a hack,nor an exploit.It is just a tool.Use it or not is each person's choice 2.The Bacon's devs are right.CCP recognized that other such tools existed,however they have not provided any explanation as to why they haven't done anything about it till Bacon came out 3.It makes me laugh and sad to see all of you screaming against Bacon,but no one has bothered to be screaming against the other such programs,which existence CCP recognized. 1. Bacon is an exploit by definition. Try using a dictionary 2. They don't need to 3. Because the other programs aren't being used to such a large scale as Bacon. Given that and the fact that no one has ever came out and publicly announced such an exploit. Why don't you post a link to another such tool? ------------------------------------

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.